Skip to main content

About your Search

20120501
20120531
STATION
CSPAN3 156
LANGUAGE
English 156
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 156 (some duplicates have been removed)
is about john brown and the events that changed the course of american history forever. tony is also a pulitzer prizewinning journalist. he worked for many years for the "wall street journal" and "the new york times." but one of the things i want to tell you about tony is he really want to tell you he is a very, very dear friend. one of the things about tony is he really and truly has a notion that we at the journey like to say that we put people in the boots of those who went before us, in order for them to know, as david mccullough told us years ago, those people who lived long ago didn't know they were living long ago. tony one-ups it. because not only do our programs try to put students and visitors and teachers into the boots of those who went long ago, tony, as he writes here, wants to get not into their boots, but into their minds. and he's done that with every book he's written, and it transports us to times and places that really challenge us. so we're here today and we'll have a conversation, and then we're going to open the floor to your questions to this amazing man. beca
in this essentially very small geographic area. you have brown at the kennedy farm invading harper's ferry in 1859. harper's ferry is a flash point and the civil war changes hands a dozen times. stonewall jackson takes harper's ferry a awe few days before, and that's why the battle happened. the union realizes lee has divided his army. they attack, and as a result of antetum, which is seven miles from the kennedy farm, lincoln issues the emancipation proclamation. so, you know, this incredible journey in our history all occurs in this very tight geographic area. i mean, it really is quite stunning. this is the irony while i was sort of bashing lincoln but suggesting that he wasn't the great emancipator initially that people imagined. he actually was on the conservative end of the anti-slavery spectrum, and this comes through again very much in his attitude towards brown, the great irony is that he eventually comes around to brown's position and that slavery -- this must become a war against slavery and ends up, you know, taking the south that begins to fulfill brown's mission but like brown become
goes there, really joins brown's band to rescue his wife and children. and the tragic part of it is he's the first of brown's band who is -- he's gunned down in the street in harper's ferry. his body is desecrated by angry whites. 50 miles short of his goal of rescuing harriet. and the virginians collected these letters that he had from harriet that appear to have been on his person and published them. that's how we have them. the governor of virginia published all the documents, and they didn't see any indictment of slavery in these letters. they just published them. you just read these letters that are just heart-breaking saying, you know, come save me, dangerfield, because like many virginia slaves of that era, she was scared that she was going to be sold to a gang labor plantation in the deep south, and that's exactly what happened. six months later, she's sold to a plantation in louisiana. so you read these letters, and they're just heart-breaking. but we have them, thanks to the state of virginia. >> you speak about the biracial nature of his band and also his support. he had inf
, "midnight rising" which is about john brown and events that changed the course of american history forever. he worked for many years for "the wall street journal" and "the new york times." he's a swre, very dear friend. one of the things i want to tell you about tony, he really and truly has a notion we like the say that we put people in the boots of those that went before us in order for them to know as david mccullough told us years ago, those people who lived long you a go didn't know they were living long ago. tony one-ups it. not only do our programs try to put students and visitors and teachers into the boots of those long ago, tony wants to get not into their boots but into their minds. and he has done that every book he has written. we are here today. a conversation and then we are going to open the floor to your questions to this amazing man. because you are our friend we can say you are an amazing man. >> they say you can't go home. lived here for 13 years and it still feels like home. there are five people in the audience i still don't know. good to be back. >> we are not very f
that is about as far as i can go with that controversial story. as secretary brown alluded to, we associate this period with mcnamara, and with vietnam. but mcnamara's involvement in a whole series of other crises, both foreign and domestic, is simply remarkable. we've heard about the dominican republic, the nato crisis, the middle east war, czechoslovakian invasion, demonstrations in the streets of the united states. any one of these crises could have defined a presidency. for example, if we look at president jimmy carter's administration, it involved notable successes, but it's best remembered for the iranian hostage issue. when the iranians took over the american embassy in tehran, and then held hostage americans for more than a year. think about mcnamara. in january 1968, the north koreans seized the uss pueblo naval vessel on the high seas. they in effect held a naval crew hostage for more than a year before releasing them. though the pueblo is a mere footnote to the tumultuous events of 1968. robert mcnamara was involved as a major participant. we all know that. but what's remarkable
controlled schools for military dependants in the south before the brown decision, and everybody who thinks that eisenhower was anti-brown really haven't done their homework, and you mentioned about my book. my book is not an opinion piece. there's not a phrase in it that's not rooted in a document or in compelling circumstantial evidence. that doesn't mean there isn't argument that can be had about motivation, but there's some things facts that aren't hidden hand facts as the phrase has become, supreme court appointments. eisenhower refused to appoint judges to federal courts who were known segregationists, refused to do that. john f. kennedy when he came in appointed those right and left, and i have to say to you, folks, i have a son named for jfk, if you want to know where i come from, okay? and, you know, it's going -- i have fun handing in the program, but, you know, facts are facts, so eisenhower did a lot. he didn't do some things that people would have liked to have seen him do, but we'll get back to little rock, because i don't want to preempt ernie talking about that, but little r
to chatham, often they will talk about whether they should have followed john brown. well, delany, or harriet tubman, or mary ann shadd-cary who had never done anything operationally that we know of. for them to say you should follow john brown is to say they should follow a captain. why did i say that? if you read frederick douglas, martin delany, mary ann shadd-cary, they refer to john brown as a captain. what does that mean? john brown wrote his own constitution. he viewed himself in that way as a general. captains don't lead generals. captains are tactical, not strategic. this organization already had a plan, it was to end slavery in league with the constitution, not write a new constitution. however they found -- they found tactical value in what john brown did. and anyone subordinate to the captain, they would encourage them to follow john brown. but you have to be subordinate to the caption. it's a tactical operation. you don't send strategically important folk on a tactical operation that may be a suicide mission. they do view john brown as a martyr because in many ways it was a suici
mentioned that john brown -- i know that several people -- i thought also mary ann chad carrie had supported him, but mammy pleasant also provided some funds. what other -- what role -- other roles did you see for her in this? >> well, first, it's logistical support. and so they provide them logistical support. they're looking to the grander plan. but as far as the officers and those in higher reasons delaney makes it very clear they're not going to support -- in the meeting with john brown. that's when john brown calls delaney a coward and delaney says, captain brown does not know the man of whom he speaks. there's no one in whose veins it flows less freely than me and it must not be said by anyone even john brown. with them, they provided logistical support for john brown and john brown had taken that on himself. so you would bring shields green, and others. you'd bring them in, they would work with him. but the organization itself like someone like mary ann shad carrie and the same with others in position they're in place to do something else in the strategic plan. >> but you don't -- wha
, but the most important thing that eisenhower did was to appoint federal judges committed to defending brown, and he appointed them particularly in the fourth and fifth circuits in the south, and he appointed men like frank johnson who was the federal judge in alabama who in 1965 cleared the way for martin luther king's "entourage" to go from selma to montgomery. frank johnson has spent 44 years on the federal bench, so he would appoint those kind of judges. he appointed ronald davies who is the presiding federal judge in little rock. we'll get back to that, and he appointed, of course, five men to the supreme court, earl warren, john marshall harlan, william brennan, potter stewart, charles evans whittaker is probably his weakest appointment. all five of them committed to the enforcement of brown. and william brennan, any of you know your supreme court history, was not a far right conservative in any way, shape or form. eisenhower actually nominated him when he was in the midst of an election campaign in the fall of '56, and he did that partly for political reasons, too. he wanted a catholi
general herbert brownell anticipated violence from almost the moment the brown decision was made. and they early on, the 101st airborne division that was sent into little rock in 1957 was trained in riot control. this was not for riots in europe. they anticipated there it might be an alternative to using the one legal out that he had which was to use the troops, hoping not to do it. but he did. but little rock is the defense of the brown iceburg. and i would point out to you that eisenhower could have chosen not to send troops. people assumed he was forced to. he chose to. he chose to very quickly. he didn't quaver around about much of the commentaries say. the time line was very short. as you mentioned, ernie, faubus announced the national guard to patrol the school on the night of september 2nd. they there there in the morning of september 3rd. on september 4th herbert brownell held a news conference and indicated specifically with the president's approval that one of the options the president could use was to use troops to enforce the supreme court decision. faubus sent a hot
can't get back here. i it's listed as casey background gillibrand. >> is this brown amendment number four? >> it's casey five. >> casey five amendment. without objection, the senator may proceed. >> thank you, madam chairman. we know that today under tfap, we have all seen in our states and probably each of us has met somebody who used to give food or money and their time to food banks and now are maybe still volunteering there but still asking for food from those banks we know what kind of pressure they're under that's what the chair and senator roberts and others did on the whole issue of tfap in increasing that. that made such an important difference. we need to do more to address the incredible ongoing needs that food banks that each of our states are trying to meet. the amendment is pretty sample, it grants a secretary the ability to not just consider commodity prices and purchase and distribution decisions but also to take into account current need in those communities in those states. so it just gives the secretary mor flexibility, which i know secretary johan, when he was the
physical effects in the world. james brown was supposed to perform in boston, and his performance was in conjunction with the assassination of dr. king. there was violence all over the country in many cities. the city fathers of boston got together with james brown and decided to have the concert proceed and to broadcast it live on television, on public television, and so the concert went on and -- and it -- it succeeded in keeping the piece in boston, so we'll get a little flavor of his performance which i don't think is noteworthy except i can't help but think about his screams at this particular moment. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> okay. yeah, you could say he always screams like that, but at that moment it just seems to carry an additional level of meaning. aretha franklin was one of those artists whose songs were not always political, but this one she is making what i think is a feminist statement, and she actually is responding to james brown's song "this is a man's world," and she -- she's asserting women's right to respect and equality. ♪ take me to heart ♪ and i'll always love you
and the vietnam war. panelists include former defense secretary harold brown and the author of mcnamara, clifford and the burdens of vietnam from 1965 to 1969. this is about an hour and a half. >>> for millions of americans, the veet ma'ietnam war was the g event in their lives whether they served in huge in vietnam or watched debate over the war at home. today it serves as a watershed period in history the same way world war ii did for previous generations. this panel this afternoon is of particular interest to me signs was a hospital corpsman stationed with the 1st marine division for six months in danang and then on the "uss sanctuary," served in tanang harbor for six months there. so it's my pleasure now to turn the program over to john hoffman, deputy chief historian at office of the secretary of defense, a retired marine colonel who is on active duty as infantry office and field historian for 17 years. in his civilian year, served in the history and museums division as chief of the army center for military history's contemporary studies branch and became deputy chief historian of the office
with you. >> okay. what was going on with the country. several things. first the brown decision had been decided. it has been unevenly enforced. the little rock crisis. really nobody knew whether or when or how school desegregation would happen in the south. the justice department was trying to force existing civil rights laws, but there were holes in the existing civil rights laws. it was mentioned earlier that under eisenhower's watch, the civil rights act was enacted. it gave the justice department additional powers to enforce civil rights. still very, very significant con strands on what the justice department can do. the naacp is caught up with the brown v. board of education. then there is martin luther king. he was catapulted in 1965. king is also looking in 1960 and '61 for ways to push the movement forward. desegregation of the military, brown v. board of education, president kennedy and robert kennedy were racial liberals. they were comfortable with social equality. they were comfortable around african-americans. which distinguished them from most of the predecessors in the off
as secretary brown suggested as mcnamara's war. whatever the difficulties of the moment, he exuded a certainty that promised eventual success. in fact, we now know his public confidence far outlasted the emergence of profound private doubts about both the winnability of the war and indeed ultimately its purposes. and his departure from the pentagon in 1968, as much i think as lbj's march 31st speech of that year marked the glorious end of an era once bright with promise. as the war provoked increasingly nasty divisions in the united states, mcnamara became a target for critics from both left and right. unaware of his muted tightly constrained and largely internalized descent, doves viewed him as the technocrat as his blind faith in technology and statistics plunged the united states into a destructive quagmire. hawks, on the other hand, announced with growing venom his alleged refusal to give the military the freedom and the means to win a war, in their view, imminently winnable. in my experience, talking with veterans over the last 40 years, only the name jane fonda is likely to provoke more
a text. >> did the relationship change at all when mr. brown became prime minister? because we know mr. brown was much closer to mr. dayko than was mr. blair closer to mr mr. dayko. >> yes, mr. dayko -- i think you'd find he was skeptical about mr. blair in a way that -- well, he was less skeptical about mr. brown. it did -- partly because mr. brown before he became leader had had conversations with mr. decker about heading up an inquiry into the 30-year rule. that in a sense was a done deal as i -- mr. brown became prime minister. but i then took on the operational side of that inquiry. and of course subsequently there were a lot of conversations with mr. decker and senior colleagues in the press about segment 55 of the protection act. >> we'll come to the detail. >> just before you go on, can i go back to a phrase i rather like, expectful acquaintanceship? was that because you or he felt that your respective paths took you into different directions and therefore that was the best way, or was it just that's -- it's just a coincidence and that's how it went and you wouldn't have minded
i've ever sent him a text. >> did the relationship change at all when mr. brown became prime minister? mr. brown was much closer to him than was mr. blair. >> yes, mr. daker was there to his, but you find that he was skeptical about mr. blair in a way that he was less skeptical about mr. brown. he did partly because mr. brown before he became leader with a view to becoming leader had had conversations with mr. daker about mr. daker heading up an inquiry into the third year rule. so i mean that in a sense was a done deal. as mr. brown became prime minister. i then took on the operational side of that inquiry. and, of course, subsequently there were conversations where mr. daker and other colleagues from the press about the data protection act increasing in sentences. >> we'll come to the details of that. before we go on, can i go back to a phrase i rather like, respectful acquaintanceship. was that because you or he felt that your respective paths took you in different directions and tlafr that was the best way, or was it it just that jurs a coincidence and you wouldn't have m
? several things. first the brown decision had been decided. it has been unevenly enforced. there had been the little rock crisis, but really nobody knew whether and when or how school desegregation would really happen in the south. the justice department was trying to force existing civil rights laws, but there were holes in the existing civil rights laws. it was mentioned earlier that under president eisenhower's watch the 1967 civil rights act was enacted, the 1967 act gave the justice department additional powers to enforce civil rights, but really still very, very significant constraints on what the justice department can do. the naacp is caught up with the struggle of trying to implement brown versus board of education, and then there is martin luther king who was catapulted to prominence with the montgomery bus boycott in 1965 and '66, but king is also looking in 1960, '61 for ways to push the movement forward. so what the context was that a lot had been done. desegregation of the military, brown versus the board of education. president kennedy and robert kennedy were both air ball
. among those testifying former federal reserve chairman paul volker. senator sherrod brown of ohio chaired the two-hour hearing. >> mr. volker nice to see you. we have three panels today. i always give moderate short opening statements. senator corker always gives thoughtful and even shorter statements. we'll begin briefly with that. i wanted to help everybody involved in getting some excellent qualified individuals to discuss such an important but admittedly broad set of topics was not easy. so i appreciate the cooperation of all of you who are major players in your own right throughout the financial system. i'll keep my message brief. i've simply say it's vital we take the necessary steps sooner rather than later to end government policies and support and encourage large complex institutions. that's why today i'm introducing my legislation the safe banking act that was known formerly as the brown kauffman bill and amendment. i think the ideas today have traction on both sides of the aisle. the full committee's ranking member shelby voted against the act in favor of brown kauffman
by gordon brown and david cameron. and other people got up to all sorts of stuff. there's no doubt about that. and part of politics is part of life. i tried to control at the center. i tried to keep a grip of things. but the reality is there are hundreds of people out there the whole time who -- anybody who works on downing street in the eyes of a journalist is a senior downing street source. anybody who works in the home office is a senior home office source. i think we did a pretty good job in having proper coordination at the center, but it's very difficult to maintain that. >> mr. powell points the finger of blame in a particular place. he says "it's the special advisers like the damian o'brieens, charlie wheelers, and ed balzes, not -- who specialize in character assassination through the pages of the newspapers. what always surprised me was that the assassins managed to persuade the press to keep quiet about their activities. however many incriminating e-mails or texts they sent." >> that's a very good point. in other words -- >> is all of that correct? >> well, no, not all of it b
's important to accept, and i think this goes for david cameron, tony blair, gordon brown, the amount of time and energy that they -- not just the people who work for them, but they as prime ministers have to divert and dedicate to kind of dealing with what ultimately are media management issues has grown. it's grown and it's grown because of the way the media is developed. i think that's a problem, too. >> you continue "they and politicians let them have power" by which, of course, you mean it is within the gift of politicians to prevent the press having power but that, of course, might have positive ramifications for pre-press. it also presupposes that politicians are not going to yield to the obvious influences and powers which might intrude on their u agree with that? >> well, i think a lot of this started under margaret thatcher. i think that newspapers were given a sense of power. the numbers that we see, the peerages and the knighthoods and the sense they were almost part of her team. i think it changed under john major. i think when we were in power, i think that we -- i think we mayb
's important to accept and i think this goes for david cameron, gordon brown, tony blair. the amount of time and that they have to deal and delegate with the media management issue, it grown because of the way the media has developed. >> and you continue they only have power if politics let them have power, by which of course you mean it is within the gift of politicians to prevent the pressing is power. >> it presupposes they are not going to yield to the obvious influentials and powers that might intrude on their decision making. would you agree with that in. >> i think a lot of this is under margaret thatcher because i think that newspapers were given a sense of power, the numbers that received the knight hoods and the sense that they were almost part of her team. i think it changed under john major and i think when we were in power, i think we maybe did give the media too much of a sense of their own place within the political fervor and we should have changed it more. >> when you're talking about conferment of power, one of the virtues identified is the freedom of press. and the bad rea
with the struggle of trying to implement brown versus the board of education and then there was martin luther king who was catapulted to prominence with the montgomery busboy cot. king is also looking in 1960, 1961 for ways to push the movement forward. so what the context was a lot had been done. desegregation of the military, brown versus board of education. they were comfortable with social equality. they were personally comfortable around african-americans, which was a -- which distinguished them from most of the predecessors in the offices of the presidency, but still nobody knew what the next step was. the next steps were driven by african-americans and whites. segregationist whites in the south. >> so harris, john f. kennedy first had to get the presidency. and part of his kpieding to the presidency he had to deal with the issues of civil rights. some of this that has gone on after eisenhower's presidency, how did he do that and how did he view civil rights at that point as a candidate before he actually got into the chair as president? one day shortly after i was hired by kennedy, i'd been
at the populations we target, we're targeting the brown population. 43% of the undocumented population in the united states are overstaters of visas. that includes the white irish nurse and the health care system in st. louis and she just has a technical violation with immigration. well that's all any of them are. so interior enforcement does not come anywhere near rivaling the frontier and border enforcement. brown is involved in this equation, i'm sorry. my job is to question some of the assumptions. some of the assumptions are that we can prosecute this out of existence. it's your job. my critique in my statement was enforcement only is not going to get it. there is an appropriate place for prosecution and the distribution of joys and costs et cetera. am i hopeful? i'm in the hope business. am i optimistic? i'm not anywhere as optimistic as doug is. we have some entrenched anti-forces to deal with here. the pirate politics and the group politics a raid against rational reform right now are significant. i just want to say that. i'm here. i'll go anywhere. somebody give me a plane ticket, i'll make
a system to be able to track real-time jerry brown's speech. so when jerry brown had an appearance there would be someone from the whitman campaign with an iphone that could then was live streaming back to whitman campaign headquarters so that the communications team could be emailing reporters responses to the actual charges that jerry brown was making in real-time, and it was the first time they had been able to piece together something like that and now you're seeing campaigns at the state level doing that type of thing now. of course at the national level you have a live stream with television stations. but as to whether or not a campaign actually made the difference, you know, in kind of an unconventional way brian billbray a congressman in san francisco in 2006, a special the election, duke cunningham had been run out of town for good reason and that was a hotly contested seat and seen as a bellwether to see how the 2006 house congressional the elections would ultimately fare. unfortunately it was not the bellwether that the republicans had hoped. but the rnc were providing a
. joanne browning would send me to the meetings. and i was a youth minister. and dr. granger brown on new year's eve said let's go to jesse jackson's house, sit at his dinner table and talk about what we're going to be talking about for black people next year. that's how i grew. but i grew, 10, 15 years ago being put at those tables. you can't wait until -- you all are going to sit there and wait until we're 45 years old and act like we're going to the kids table. let's reach back for the 20-something-year-olds that are coming out and can communicate to these young ones and help mobilize and energize them and that's how we've got to do it. >> i will take five questions. five hands real quick. one, two, three, four, five. i'm going to take six as my colleague stood up. six. one question each now, mind you all. >> i'm listening to jeff johnson talk like a son and it makes sense because of the make-up of the panel. but are we on the brink, because we have people who don't care and we've got this apathetic attitude and recidivism, low economic indicator. are we at a point of anarchy in this c
. appreciate your comments. mr. jarsulic, welcome back to the committee. >> thank you, chairman brown, ranking member corker. thank you for the invitation to testify today. let me start with the observation that the very largest bank holding companies, which for convenience we can think of as the ten largest, are now distinctly different from the rest of the banking industry. they're more highly leveraged than other banks, they're far more likely to operate large and complex broker dealers and more likely to be directly dependent on unstable sources of short-term financing. each of these characteristics made the large bank holding companies vulnerable during the financial crisis and each of these characteristics needs to be addressed by effective implementation of relevant sections of the dodd-frank act. during the crisis, high leverage, that is a high ratio of assets toic quit, increase the likelihood that the large companies would become insolvent if asset prices declined significantly. during the period 19 90 to 2000, the ten large bank holding companies had a leverage ratio of about 21, wh
antagonist, his own vice president alexander stevens and the governor of the state, joseph brown, led the assault. still, georgia remained stalwartly for the president. as late as 1864, vice president stevens and governor brown could not turn the state legislature against davis. until the bitter end, davis remained the dominant political force in the confederacy. finally, let's turn to davis as specific military commander in chief. davis never shunned his role as leaders of the confederate people and nations, as i've tried to show. at the same time, he took quite seriously his position as a military commander in chief, as the head of the confederate armed forces. davis considered himself an expert in military matters and he believed himself eminently qualified to command an army or to command commanders of armies. he never doubted his own military ability or judgment. and directing the confederate war efforts, davis adopted hands-on tactics, his own predilection, as well as his sense of duty involved in all aspects of confederate military from the trivial to the deadly serious. his ad
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 156 (some duplicates have been removed)